NATARSHA LYNETT WILLIAMS

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

PER CURIAM.

Natarsha Lynett Williams petitions for a belated appeal of her judgment and sentence. The petition alleges that, after her sentencing, Williams contacted her aunt and asked her to request trial counsel to file an appeal. Williams claims that counsel told her aunt that he “didn’t do appeals.” Williams asserts that she interpreted this comment to mean that counsel would file the appeal but would not represent her on appeal.

We issued an order, pursuant to Staley v. State, 12 So. 3d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), relinquishing jurisdiction for appointment of a special master for the purpose of issuing an order to show cause directed to the State Attorney, conducting an evidentiary hearing if warranted by the State’s response, and issuing a written report and recommendation concerning Williams’ entitlement to a belated appeal. In response to the special master’s order to show cause, an assistant state attorney indicated that she spoke with trial counsel, who told her that he had no recollection of whether Williams or her aunt directed him to file a notice of appeal. Accordingly, the assistant state attorney indicated that the State did not object to a belated appeal. Based on this response, the special master concluded that an evidentiary hearing was not warranted as the State did not express a good-faith basis for disputing Petitioner’s claim.

The failure to file a timely notice of appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction. Joseph v. State, 157 So. 3d 546, 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). “The parties cannot confer jurisdiction on the Court by agreement or acquiescence.” Shannon v. Cheney Bros. Inc., 157 So. 3d 397, 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). For this reason, “it is generally insufficient for a special master to recommend a belated appeal based simply on its finding the State does not object to the petition.” Pelham v. State, 279 So. 3d 852, 854 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). That said, “a special master can look at the pertinent facts and conclude that the lack of State’s objection is an admission to the facts as alleged in a defendant’s petition.” Id. We further indicated that “[a] special master . . . should make this determination evident in its report and recommendation.” Id. See also Glover v. State, 284 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). As we did in Pelham, we construe the lack of objection as an admission of the allegations in the petition.

We, therefore, grant the petition for belated appeal. Petitioner shall be allowed a belated appeal from the sentence rendered on September 13, 2021, in Escambia County Circuit Court case number 2020-CF-1723B. A copy of this order shall be provided to the clerk of the circuit court for treatment as the notice of appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D).

To the extent that Petitioner moves for appointment of counsel in this proceeding, we deny that motion. However, if Petitioner qualifies for appointed counsel, then the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent Petitioner on appeal.

LEWIS, WINOKUR, and NORDBY, JJ., concur. _____________________________